User talk:OrbitalVoid49
Welcome!
[edit source ]Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.
The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.
The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.
- Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
- It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
- If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
- Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
- When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
- If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
- Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.
Happy editing! Cheers, Suonii180 (talk) 11:33, 1 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
Your submission at Articles for creation: Content Warning (Video Game) has been accepted
[edit source ]
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Pbritti (talk) 13:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message
[edit source ]
Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page . If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 18 November 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
You won big at Wikipedia’s 25th birthday party!
[edit source ]
Congrats on making the leaderboard at WikiLengths at Wikipedia’s birthday party! Your adept skill at guessing which Wikipedia article is longer is being recognized with a prize, and we’re excited for you to claim it! Please email wp25@wikimedia.org with your username in the subject line, and we’ll send you redemption details.
Cheers to 25 years of character counts at their best! ELappen (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 16 January 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
Racist QFT language revision
[edit source ]Can you explain why you reversed my edit on the page for color confinement? I'm a researcher in the field and gawk at the idea of calling it "infrared slavery".
A quick Google search will show just how uncommon the name is. Given that, its racist connotation, and the fact that this name was only added to the article in December of last year, it should be removed. The source for its addition is a historical review too, it isn't even using it in the sense of the modern term, but rather quoting sources from 50+ years ago. ~2026-26403-43 (talk) 23:43, 30 April 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
Hi
[edit source ]I think you should probably explain this revision on the article's talk page. Your reasoning is not self-evident. Also, it's not entirely clear which source precisely you are claiming does not qualify as an RS. I'm guessing that it is the source associated with the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft but I could be wrong. Sean.hoyland (talk) 15:34, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
- Hi. Thanks for the message. Yes, I would referring to the article from the Quincy Institute. I believe this article from Snopes should explain why I left that tag. I do believe some clarification or another source would help with the article in my opinion. OrbitalVoid49 (talk) 16:21, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
RE Oliver Killeen edits
[edit source ]Hi. This should be OK. Reflinks are valid. [1].
Yours, ~2026-15135-71 (talk) 21:32, 9 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
Iran War
[edit source ]Hey, I saw your message at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2026_Iran_war#Australia. I don't have enough edits to suggest it myself, but if you like [the following] enough could you consider chucking it in the talk page?
Australia, Greece, Turkey, Germany and Spain have all sent ships/aircraft to defend someone attacked by Iran (Australia for the UAE, the rest to defend Cyprus). A drop-down menu could be made in the infobox for nations like those listed above, that have not been attacked but are supporting those that have? Decooldude (talk) 04:13, 11 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
Unmanned Systems Battalion "RUGBY TEAM" moved to draftspace
[edit source ]Thanks for your contributions to Unmanned Systems Battalion "RUGBY TEAM". Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it has too many problems of language or grammar, it is promotional and reads like an advertisement and it consists of machine-generated text. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. SpragueThomson talk 15:36, 22 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
- Thanks, I assumed it was an LLM generated article but didn’t know if I should’ve nominated it for Speedy Deletion. Glad it’s taken care of. OrbitalVoid49 (talk) 06:17, 23 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
Standard Ebooks links
[edit source ]Hi - thanks for adding a link to the Standard Ebooks production of The Four Feathers. We add links to SE productions using Template:StandardEbooks and we track them with a spreadsheet; if you're interested in adding links to productions more broadly, could I ask that you do the same? I can provide more info on the distribution list thread dedicated to this. Smith (talk) 11:04, 8 April 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
Disambiguation link notification for May 9
[edit source ]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sharona Nazarian, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Democratic Party was added. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 22:23, 9 May 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
Please take a moment to read WP:BLP, which specifically states that information must be from a neutral point of view. Including the opinions of a political opponent in a mayoral race, where they accuse their opponent of "doing his best Trump impression" and "taking on a violent trend" could hardly be viewed as "neutral". Rather than edit war over this, I suggest you take it to WP:BLPN. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:22, 17 May 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
Telfairia pedata
[edit source ]You have had at least 19 spates of Wikipedia activity since I invited you to defend your reversions, and your characterisation of my edits as unconstructive, on Telfairia pedata.
Will you be attempting to justify your actions there? Will you be defending your accusation against my edit, and if not, will you retract and apologise for it? ~2026-31706-91 (talk) 08:54, 5 June 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
- Yeah you can go ahead and keep your edits on that article. I don’t feel strongly enough about the article to justify my actions on it. My apologies. OrbitalVoid49 (talk) 20:39, 5 June 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
- So you admit that you twice reverted the page to a far inferior status? Any reason that you did that? Did you actually even read how you were changing it? ~2026-31706-91 (talk) 06:47, 8 June 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
Lexington, Kentucky reverts
[edit source ]Yes...will you please indicate the precise assertions requiring citation? Is it the fortifications (which are uncited in the following paragraph, BTW)? Is it "Fort Lexington" (ibid.) Let's please get this done so that I can have my edits restored, otherwise, I can just undo your reverts and cite everything in the edit... ~2026-33318-71 (talk) 12:27, 5 June 2026 (UTC) [reply ]